Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BUG - Suggested folder path should not contain existing Fiori project #2316

Open
3 tasks
martinjanus-sap opened this issue Sep 3, 2024 · 0 comments
Open
3 tasks

Comments

@martinjanus-sap
Copy link
Contributor

Related Feature

Feature request: issue number

Description

From this issue: https://github.wdf.sap.corp/ux-engineering/tools-suite/issues/31006

Currently the default folder path for generating an SAP Fiori application does not consider if there may already be a Fiori app in the suggested folder. This can lead to a situation where one Fiori app can be generated inside another.

Steps to Reproduce

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Open VSCode and close any open folders or workspaces.
  2. Create a FIori application, it gets added to the projects folder and a new workspace gets created.
  3. Launch the generator again.
  4. On the project attributes step, the default project path folder will be the first folder in the workspace, which in this case contains a Fiori application.

Expected results

If the suggested project folder contains a Fiori application, the following validation message should be displayed and the user prevented from continuing:

The project folder path already contains an SAP Fiori application. Please choose a different folder and try again.

Actual results

The suggested project folder already contains a Fiori application, and therefore this newly generated app would pollute the existing Fiori app and not besupported.

Screenshots

image

Version/Components/Environment

Add any other context about the problem here
OS:

  • Mac OS
  • Windows
  • Other

Root Cause Analysis

Problem

{describe the problem}

Fix

{describe the fix}

Why was it missed

{Some explanation why this issue might have been missed during normal development/testing cycle}

How can we avoid this

{if we don’t want to see this type of issues anymore what we should do to prevent}

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant